Judgment :- 1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order AG (A&E)/PENPO9/1/S349-1918/RVN/2003-2004/10624 dated 5.3.2004, of the fourth respondent with the consequential relief to direct the respondents to restore the pay of the petitioner as Rs.2,060/- (Rupees two thousand and sixty only) in the scale of pay of Rs.2000-3200 with effect from 1.6.1988, and Rs.8,825/-(Rupees eight thousand eight hundred and twenty-five only) as on 1.1.1996, and fix the petitioner's last drawn pay at Rs.10,475/- (Rupees ten thousand four hundred and seventy-five only) and fix the pensionary benefits accordingly. 2. Order was passed by the respondent No.3 re-fixing the pay of the petitioner, by holding that the earlier fixation of the petitioner's pay was not correct. The petitioner challenged the order before the learned Tamil Nadu State Administrative Tribunal, where the Original Application was admitted and stay was granted in favour of the petitioner. 3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner was that the impugned order cannot be sustained as it is based on an order passed by the respondent No.3 in revising the pay scale of the petitioner, which was stayed by the learned Tamil Nadu State Administrative Tribunal, therefore was deemed to be suspended. 4. It is not in dispute that the Original Application filed by the petitioner challenging the order of revision of pay, was dismissed in default and has not been restored; meaning thereby that the order passed by the respondent No.3 revising the pay of petitioner, holds good. 5. The impugned order is only a consequential order and therefore, once the basic order is in force, its consequential order cannot be challenged or interfered with, in the absence of challenge of basic order. 6. No merit. Dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected MPs are also dismissed.